"So basically, the surgeon general and thousands of doctors are wrong and you are right?"

Yes. Why not? I don't have an agenda to push, except freedom to choose.

"Time to pick my battles and arguing logic with someone who refuses to yield to reason and FACTS (medically proven and verified facts) is not a productive use of my time."

You haven't argued logic and you still haven't managed to name 3 people that have been scientifically proven to have died from SHS. All you have done is shown me the "Conclusions" that those with an agenda want you to see. I have said to look at the studies themselves.Still, if you wish to no longer debate this subject with me then that is your right.

"Oh, and by the way, being a safety professional, toxic is toxic, no matter what the dose or concentration. Whether I have an ounce of MEK (Methyl ethyl ketone) or 55 gallons, it is still considered and regulated as a toxic substance.

The same is true of carcinogens. Regardless of the quantity or dose in a substance, they must all be listed."

As I said earlier, we are not talking about ounces. Femtograms are unimaginally small. I don't think you are quite getting that.

Dereck wrote,

"Scottie, we are in the same mindset. McSensei hasn't come out to my knowledge and says he smokes or not but I would say yes. I would also say he is living in a fantasy world that he is trying to make smoking seem not as unhealthy as it appears to be ... what, does he work for the tobacco company?"

Firstly I would have thought Gavins post would have cleared that up, but yes I am a smoker.I don't live in a fantasy world it's just that I have a tendency to disbelieve things told to me by "Authority."A healthy trait I would say.Do you think Governments don't tell lies, 'ahem''WMD''ahem'!

"Comparing banning of animals because it irritates him to banning of a known carcinogenic that has the medical world and organizations such as the government promoting its banning ... that is stretching it big time."

Well here's the thing. If smoking and SHS was sooooo bad, why not just ban it.And don't come back with the tax thing because if something was so bad and killed off so many people from just the mereist whiff then the Government would find a way to offset the tax.If it looks like it, smells like it and comes from a place renowned for it then it probably is Bu11sh1t.

"Saying that smoking a little is better then smoking a lot; OH MY GOD! Everybody reacts differently to things and somebody that smokes very little can have the same repercussions as somebody that smokes a lot. The fact still remains that a little or a lot of exposure is exposure and it is not good for you at all. You can not set limits on stuff like that."

Would you stay for 20 minutes in a locked room with a car engine running? No, I thought not, but you wouldn't worry too much about spending 20 minutes in an indoor multi story car park. The same car park where you wouldn't be allowed to smoke a cigarette. Oh yeah. That makes sense.The dose makes the poison.

"Since you like analogies lets use one that you might get. Say you got stabbed with a knife "once"; there is a possibility that you will die and then maybe you will live. Say you got stabbed with a knife a "multiple" amount of times; there is still a possibility that you will live and higher possibility that you will die. I suspect that you don't want to be stabbed at all, that you don't want to take a chance regardless of once or multiple times. Whether once or multiple times it is not good and the medical world and anybody with some sensibility would recognize this. It is not rocket science"

But the chance of you contracting the disease is tiny in the first place. Just like the chance of being stabbed is small and before the smoking bans came in people had a choice of whether to visit smoky places like you would have a choice of whether or not you go to places you are likely to get stabbed.

"You can't make smoking look good no matter how you look at it. People do die from smoking, people have died from second hand smoke, people who smoke or because of second hand smoke have incurred health problems. Repeated exposure being a smoker or nonsmoker to cigarette smoke only rises the more you are exposed to it. I don't want to take those risks nor would I want to put those risks on anybody else out of common decency.

You can fluff up your stats and your way of thinking but in this case and matter you are wrong. "

Respiratory DiseasesThe irritant and inflammatory effects of tobacco smoke lead to increased cell turnover, damage to cells and tissues in the throat and lungs, and interference with the normal barrier and clearance mechanism of the lung. The loss of the protective cilia allows harmful smoke particles, dust and bacteria to invade the lungs... thus reducing resistance to lung diseases.

Studies have indicated that smoking is the primary risk factor for accelerated decline in respiratory function. For instance, "forced expiratory volume in one second" test (FEV1) is an often-used measurement of lung function. FEV1 normally declines with age, but while in nonsmokers this decline is some 20-30ml per year, in current smokers this decline is 25-80ml per year.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One third of people who breath in high levels of secondhand smoke have damage to their lungs similar to that seen in smokers, doctors reported on Monday.

They used a special kind of magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, scan to look at the lungs of non-smokers who had high exposure to other people's cigarette smoke and found evidence of the kind of damage that causes emphysema.

"We interpreted those changes as early signs of lung damage, representing very mild forms of emphysema," said Chengbo Wang, a magnetic resonance physicist at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, who led the study.

"Almost one third of nonsmokers who had been exposed to secondhand cigarette smoke for a long time developed these structural changes," Wang added in a statement.

"To our knowledge, this is the first imaging study to find lung damage in non-smokers heavily exposed to secondhand smoke. We hope our work strengthens the efforts of legislators and policymakers to limit public exposure to secondhand smoke."

MacedoniaAnother Stray Bullet Injures 4yr-old Girl in Macedonia PlaygroundDnevnik Macedonia, Transcript6 August 2007The celebration bullets kill people too. We seem to not be able to learn this lesson, and because of that, we are often witnesses of incidents in which stray bullets end up hitting innocent bystanders. A family celebration for someone can easily become tragedy for others. Only by chance the 4-year-old Jana from Skopje did not end up being the new victim of the stray bullets, and from representation of life and hope to be turned...

Iraq7 Dead, 50 Wounded by Stray Bullets as Iraqi Soccer Fans Fire Guns in AirReuters29 July 2007BAGHDAD -- Crowds of ecstatic Iraqis wept tears of joy and fired rifles into the air on Sunday after their soccer team's victory in the Asian Cup triggered the biggest street celebrations since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Police in Baghdad and Kut reported at least seven deaths and more than 50 people wounded by stray bullets as gun-toting revelers took to the streets in a wave of euphoria unprecedented after four years of war....

BrazilStray Bullets Rain Down on Rio de Janeiro: 87 Innocents Hit in 3 MonthsSan Francisco Chronicle / AP20 June 2007RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil -- The toll from stray bullets that rain down on Rio from the city's steep hillside slums as police and drug gangs battle with automatic weapons has grown sharply, with one innocent bystander killed or wounded every day. Businesses and schools in the line of fire have been shuttered. Thousands of children are staying home. Even air travel is affected -- domestic jet routes were diverted from Rio's downtown...

Etc. Plenty more you can find with a quick search.

Quote:Actually it has been shown to have a protective effect on conditions like dementia and parkinsons.

Cancer, pulmonary and respitory diseases are "protective effects"?!

Quote:Actually I disagree. Society, especially the US, is obligated to allow people to do things which may harm them. That is exactly what freedom is all about.Sometimes I wonder why your Founding Fathers ever bothered.

No, the founding father were actually quite smart. Society is NOT obligated to allow freedoms which harm others, especially when that harm is the exclusive effect of that behavior.

Quote:You may not like the smell and with that I can sympathize, but not liking something is no reason to blanket ban a perfectly legal substance that is enjoyed by a quarter of the population.

Cocaine and heroin were both legal and popular at one point in time. That does not make those activities protected forever. Smoking is a health threat that continues to persist in spite of crushing amounts of data, only because of the monetary influence of the industry. Period.

Quote:Then you would also need to ban the other contributing factors as well. I don't think many people would like that and in all honesty, I don't think it would be possible.

Poor logic that I have addressed before. Many of the other incidental hazards referred to are a by-product of an otherwise benign product or effect. Cigarettes have no other purpose than to degrade people's health - including people that don't even smoke.

Quote:Except we are not talking about 55 gallon drums here we are talking about a few nanograms, pictograms and femtograms.Do you realise exactly how small the particles we are talking about are?

Wait, aren't you the one saying "it depends upon the dose"? A quarter of the population is a hell of a lot of "nanograms, pictograms and femtograms" floating around, isn't it? We're not talking about making YOU ONLY put away tobacco products. We mean EVERYONE!

Quote:Yes. Why not? I don't have an agenda to push, except freedom to choose.

Health and safety is an agenda? Isn't that a basic human right - almost everywhere?

Quote:Would you stay for 20 minutes in a locked room with a car engine running? No, I thought not, but you wouldn't worry too much about spending 20 minutes in an indoor multi story car park. The same car park where you wouldn't be allowed to smoke a cigarette.

Poor analogy for the USA and most of Europe. Vehicle exhaust is treated via catalytic converters to remove most of the pollutants emitted - not true of cigarettes. Would you want to stay in a (same size) locked room with 50 chain-smokers?

Quote:And you still haven't been able to name three.

Strawman.

Have a good night. See you tomorrow!

_________________________"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

With that said, I'll say this: Smoke if you want to. If it makes you happy, it makes me happy for you. Frankly, I enjoy the rare cigar or hookah, myself. (legal stuff only) Just try to keep your pleasure from becoming my misery, ok?

If I go into a bar, I know I'm subjecting myself to smoke. But if I go into a restaurant, I want my steak to taste like beef, not beef plus your stanky tobaccy. Please step outside and keep that rot to yourself, plskthxbye.

_________________________
In my walk in the martial way, my hope is that as long as I live, I will always be a beginner.